I thought Australia looked good… aside from surrendering two goals due to comically bad defensive breakdowns. But their overall game and control was very solid. Granted, against a team they definitely should have been dominating.
It’s a shame that there’s almost no suspense at all in the final round of games. Australia vs. Norway is basically the only game being played for anything other than winning-the-group-vs.-coming-second. I guess Mexico can theoretically sneak past England, but it would take some truly preposterous swings in goal differential, unless I’m looking at it wrong.
Well, it wasn’t a defensive breakdown – it was Uzunlar in both cases. Once, okay, it happens – but twice? I’d take her out for the next one. But yeah, Australia-Norway should be good. My money’s on Australia.
Well, unfortunately now we know the answer to the question: “Is it possible to have worse refereeing than the (men’s) World Cup?”
Allowing Marta’s first goal in Brazil-Norway was pretty bad, but could be just a mistake/bad angle/wanting to let them play. It’s harder to excuse the referee in that game stopping to talk to a shaken up player without blowing the whistle, then looking up in surprise at the play still going on, and hustling to catch up.
I did like the espn column calling Marta’s goal a “Maradona moment”. Too bad it wasn’t a pivotal goal, cause I was looking forward to Marta’s ‘hand of God’ explanation in ten years.
The France-Germany match was pretty wild, what with 6 goals and the French keeper sent off with a red card. Germany are the better side, but nice to see the relatively new-to-the-World-Cup French side really fighting.
Australia 2, Norway 1. Australia go through to likely face the US, with Brazil vs Sweden presumably the other match (Brazil as expected beat Equatorial Guinea 3-0) (Brazil’s first goal maybe the best goal of the tournament so far).
Australia v. Norway was quite a match. Australia just needed a draw, and had given up two goals to EQG basically on defensive goofs. So they go down 1-0 on yet another terrible defensive mistake by the same player. Then something like 30 seconds later they score a beautiful equalizer. A bit later, Norway gets a free kick and hits the crossbar. Then Australia go up 2-1 on a lovely header after some post-corner-kick hustle.
Sad end of an era for Norway, who were a dominant force in the early days of the WWC, runners up to the US in 91 and winners in 95. They fail to make it out of the group stage for the first time ever.
Meanwhile we’ve got Germany vs. Japan and England vs. France coming up out of the other two groups. Hard to see Germany losing, but England vs. France seems like a good one.
USA down 0-2 to Sweden at halftime. The US has generally had the better of the run of play and missed many opportunities, but had some defensive breakdowns, with a clearly correct PK call leading to the first goal, and an unlucky carom on a carelessly surrendered free kick leading to the other one.
Missed the last couple of games, alas. But before we leave the group stage, can I complain about the fraudulent Equatorial Guinea team? I know every squad plays games with player nationality, but this was ridiculous. Practically every EQ starter was a rental player from Brazil. And if you believe Wikipedia, Vania even violated FIFA’s own eligibility rules. But it’s probably generally true that EQ was playing within FIFA’s rules, such as they are. But those rules need to be seriously tightened up if the national teams are not to become mere club teams, filled with players for hire.
I thought U.S. showed some surprising vulnerability in the back, a little impatience and poor touches in attacking from the midfield, and no luck at all finishing (plus zero mistakes by the Swedish defense). Sweden had another player in all alone and could have been 3-0 without a poor finish by Sweden and great save by Solo, but then again could have been 6-2 US with better luck and finishing by the US-- there were a lot of good crosses that were headed over the bar or caromed right to a defender.
US-Brazil is going to be interesting. I think playing off of Brazil is a big mistake, just like playing off the Brazil men is (or, as the hockey Bruins proved, playing off the Canucks); it just gives them time to pick you apart, but with the US back line getting burned like that, I wonder if the midfield will be aggressive.
When the USA falls out against Brazil tomorrow we’ll be guaranteed a first time winner of the event. Hopefully Pia Sundhage will also get canned. Of course the United States has never not finished in the top 4 of a WWC.
I’m not quite as pessimistic as you are. The US has a strong team, they just need to start solid. If they fall behind they’ll probably lose as they’re not used to playing from behind, but if they get the first goal I think they’ll take care of Brazil.
Whatever they do, they need to put Amy LePeilbet on the bench. A butcher could have played better. The foul that gave up the PK was bad enough, but the deflection was unforgivable. when you’re acting as a wall you stand still. The deflection was entirely a result of a flinch. She would have been better off letting it go right by as Hope Solo was in good position. At that level you grab your junk (or cover your ovaries, as it were) and take one for the team. Period.
I’m also hoping that Abby Wambach has finally broken her run of bad luck with her (iffy) goal the other day. If she puts a few on net one is bound to go in.
Germany vs Japan was incredibly exciting. I was cheering for Japan on the general underdog principle, and nearly had a heart attack during the last 10 minutes or so. Amazing.
Now go Australia and USA!
I think they should use citizenship AND residency to determine eligibility. So if someone wants to play for the US they have to have US citizenship and maintain a primary residence here for at least one World Cup cycle.